COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Undocumented Latinx Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department.

This cross-sectional study examines COVID-19 infection status, vaccination uptake, and perceptions about the vaccine among Latinx patients presenting to the emergency department in California.

State Public Insurance Coverage Policies and Postpartum Care Among Immigrants.

Importance: Professional medical organizations recommend that adults receive routine postpartum care. Yet, some states restrict public insurance coverage for undocumented immigrants and recently documented immigrants (those who received legal documentation status within the past 5 years). Objective: To examine the association between public insurance coverage and postpartum care among low-income immigrants and the difference in receipt of postpartum care among immigrants relative to nonimmigrants. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pooled, cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System for 19 states and New York City including low-income adults with a live birth between 2012 and 2019. Exposure: Giving birth in a state that offered public insurance coverage for postpartum care to recently documented or undocumented immigrants. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported receipt of postpartum care by the category of coverage offered (full coverage: states that offered publicly funded postpartum care regardless of immigration status; moderate coverage: states that offered publicly funded postpartum care to lawfully residing immigrants without a 5-year waiting period, but did not offer postpartum care to undocumented immigrants; no coverage: states that did not offer publicly funded postpartum care to lawfully present immigrants before 5 years of legal residence or to undocumented immigrants). Results: The study included 72 981 low-income adults (20 971 immigrants [29%] and 52 010 nonimmigrants [71%]). Of the 19 included states and New York City, 6 offered full coverage, 9 offered moderate coverage, and 4 offered no coverage; 1 state (Oregon) switched from offering moderate coverage to offering full coverage. Compared with the states that offered full coverage, receipt of postpartum care among immigrants was 7.0-percentage-points lower (95% CI, -10.6 to -3.4 percentage points) in the states that offered moderate coverage and 11.3-percentage-points lower (95% CI, -13.9 to -8.8 percentage points) in the states that offered no coverage. The differences in the receipt of postpartum care among immigrants relative to nonimmigrants were also associated with the coverage categories. Compared with the states that offered full coverage, there was a 3.3-percentage-point larger difference (95% CI, -5.3 to -1.4 percentage points) in the states that offered moderate coverage and a 7.7-percentage-point larger difference (95% CI, -10.3 to -5.0 percentage points) in the states that offered no coverage. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with states without insurance restrictions, immigrants living in states with public insurance restrictions were less likely to receive postpartum care. Restricting public insurance coverage may be an important policy-driven barrier to receipt of recommended pregnancy care and improved maternal health among immigrants.

Emergency Department Utilization Among Undocumented Latino Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether Latino undocumented immigrants had a steeper decline in Emergency Department (ED) utilization compared to Latino Medi-Cal patients in a Los Angeles safety-net hospital, March 13, 2020, to May 8, 2020. STUDY DESIGN: The data were extracted from patient medical records for ED visits at LAC + USC Medical Center from January 2018 to September 2020. We analyzed weekly ED encounters among undocumented Latino patients in the nine-week period after COVID was declared a national emergency. We applied time-series routines to identify and remove autocorrelation in ED encounters before examining its relation with the COVID-19 pandemic. We included Latino patients 18 years of age and older who were either on restricted or full-scope Medi-Cal (n = 230,195). RESULTS: All low-income Latino patients, regardless of immigration status, experienced a significant decline in ED utilization during the first nine weeks of the pandemic. Undocumented patients, however, experienced an even steeper decline. ED visits for this group fall below expected levels between March 13, 2020, and May 8, 2020 (coef. = - 38.67; 95% CI = - 71.71, - 5.63). When applied to the weekly mean of ED visits, this translates to a 10% reduction below expected levels in ED visits during this time period. CONCLUSION: Undocumented immigrants' health care utilization was influenced by external events that occurred early in the pandemic, such as strict stay-at-home orders and the public charge rule change. Health care institutions and local policy efforts could work to ensure that hospitals are safer spaces for undocumented immigrants to receive care without immigration concerns.

Undocumented Older Latino Immigrants in the United States: Population Projections and Share of Older Undocumented Latinos by Health Insurance Coverage and Chronic Health Conditions, 2018-2038.

OBJECTIVES: This article focuses on the older Latino undocumented population and anticipates how their current demographic characteristics and health insurance coverage might affect future population size and health insurance trends. METHODS: We use the 2013-2018 American Community Survey as a baseline to project growth in the Latino 55 and older undocumented population over the next 20 years. We use the cohort component method to estimate population size across different migration scenarios and distinguish between aging in place and new immigration. We also examine contemporary health insurance coverage and chronic health conditions among 55 and older undocumented Latinos from the 2003-2014 California Health Interview Survey. We then project health insurance rates in 2038 among Latino immigrants under different migration and policy scenarios. RESULTS: If current mortality, migration, and policy trends continue, projections estimate that 40% of undocumented Latino immigrants will be 55 years or older by 2038-nearly all of whom will have aged in place. Currently, 40% of older Latino undocumented immigrants do not have insurance. Without policies that increase access to insurance, projections estimate that the share who are uninsured among all older Latinos immigrants will rise from 15% to 21%, and the share who is both uninsured and living with a chronic health condition will rise from 5% to 9%. DISCUSSION: Without access to health care, older undocumented immigrants may experience delayed care and more severe morbidity. Our projections highlight the need to develop and enact policies that can address impending health access concerns for an increasingly older undocumented Latino population.

Measuring the invisible: perinatal health outcomes of unregistered women giving birth in Belgium, a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The unregistered population remains under-researched because of its "invisible" status in statistics. Studies on perinatal health outcomes of unregistered women remains particularly limited. Our objectives were 1) to describe the sociodemographic profiles of women who are not legally residing in Belgium and 2) to analyze the associations of registration status with pregnancy outcomes according to socioeconomic status and nationality. METHODS: We analysed data from birth and death certificates taken from the Belgian civil registration system, linked with the National Population Registry (NPR). The data relates to all singleton babies born between 2010 and 2016 (n = 871,283), independent of their mother's NPR registration status. We used logistic regression to estimate the odds ratios for the associations between perinatal outcomes (perinatal mortality, prematurity and low birth weight) and maternal NPR registration status according to socioeconomic status and maternal nationality. RESULTS: Over the study period, 1.9% of births were to mothers without NPR-registration. Unregistered women from newer EU member states and non-European countries were particularly disadvantaged from a socioeconomic point of view. Apart from women with a South American nationality, all other groups of unregistered women had higher rates of prematurity, low birth weight, and perinatal mortality, compared to registered mothers (p < 0.0001). Unregistered women from Belgium and EU15 nationalities had particularly higher rates of prematurity, low birth weight, and perinatal mortality, compared to registered mothers, even after adjustment for socioeconomic status (p < 0.0001). The excess of perinatal mortality for non-European unregistered mothers could partly be explained by their precarious socioeconomic situation. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to include data on mothers who were not legally residing in Belgium. Unregistered women giving birth in Belgium are likely a heterogeneous socioeconomic group. Overall, unregistered women have increased risks of adverse perinatal outcomes, but it is likely that the causal mechanisms differ starkly between Belgian, European and non-European women. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms behind these accrued rates. It is important to keep measuring the health outcomes of the populations which are "invisible" in national statistics, in order to identify the groups in most need of integration and access to services.

Why we dehumanize illegal immigrants: A US mixed-methods study.

Dehumanization is a topic of significant interest for academia and society at large. Empirical studies often have people rate the evolved nature of outgroups and prior work suggests immigrants are common victims of less-than-human treatment. Despite existing work that suggests who dehumanizes particular outgroups and who is often dehumanized, the extant literature knows less about why people dehumanize outgroups such as immigrants. The current work takes up this opportunity by examining why people dehumanize immigrants said to be illegal and how measurement format affects dehumanization ratings. Participants (N = 672) dehumanized such immigrants more if their ratings were made on a slider versus clicking images of hominids, an effect most pronounced for Republicans. Dehumanization was negatively associated with warmth toward illegal immigrants and the perceived unhappiness felt by illegal immigrants from U.S. immigration policies. Finally, most dehumanization is not entirely blatant but instead, captured by virtuous violence and affect as well, suggesting the many ways that dehumanization can manifest as predicted by theory. This work offers a mechanistic account for why people dehumanize immigrants and addresses how survey measurement artifacts (e.g., clicking on images of hominids vs. using a slider) affect dehumanization rates. We discuss how these data extend dehumanization theory and inform empirical research.

Association of Expanded Prenatal Care Coverage for Immigrant Women With Postpartum Contraception and Short Interpregnancy Interval Births.

Importance: Access to prenatal and postpartum care is restricted among women with low income who are recent or undocumented immigrants enrolled in Emergency Medicaid. Objective: To examine the association of extending prenatal care coverage to Emergency Medicaid enrollees with postpartum contraception and short interpregnancy interval births. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used a difference-in-differences design to compare the staggered rollout of prenatal care in Oregon with South Carolina, a state that does not cover prenatal or postpartum care. Linked Medicaid claims and birth certificate data from 2010 to 2016 were examined for an association between prenatal care coverage for women whose births were covered by Emergency Medicaid and subsequent short IPI births. Additional maternal and infant health outcomes were also examined, including postpartum contraceptive use, preterm birth, and neonatal intensive care unit admission. The association between the policy change and measures of policy implementation (number of prenatal visits) and quality of care (receipt of 8 guideline-based screenings) was also analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed from August 2020 to March 2021. Exposures: Medicaid coverage of prenatal care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Postpartum contraceptive use, defined as receipt of any contraceptive method within 60 days of delivery; short IPI births, defined as occurring within 18 months of a previous pregnancy. Results: The study population consisted of 26 586 births to women enrolled in Emergency Medicaid in Oregon and South Carolina. Among these women, 14 749 (55.5%) were aged 25 to 35 years, 25 894 (97.4%) were Black, Hispanic, Native American, Alaskan, Pacific Islander, or Asian women or women with unknown race/ethnicity, and 17 905 (67.3%) lived in areas with urban zip codes. Coverage of prenatal care for women in Emergency Medicaid was associated with significant increases in mean (SD) prenatal visits (increase of 10.3 [0.9] prenatal visits) and prenatal quality. Prenatal care screenings (eg, anemia screening: increase of 65.7 percentage points [95% CI, 54.2 to 77.1 percentage points]) and vaccinations (eg, influenza vaccination: increase of 31.9 percentage points [95% CI, 27.4 to 36.3 percentage points]) increased significantly following the policy change. Although postpartum contraceptive use increased following prenatal care expansion (increase of 1.5 percentage points [95% CI, 0.4 to 2.6 percentage points]), the policy change was not associated with a reduction in short IPI births (-4.5 percentage points [95% CI, -9.5 to 0.5 percentage points), preterm births (-0.6 percentage points [95% CI, -3.2 to 2.0 percentage points]), or neonatal intensive care unit admissions (increase of 0.8 percentage points [95% CI, -2.0 to 3.6 percentage points]). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that expanding Emergency Medicaid benefits to include prenatal care significantly improved receipt of guideline-concordant prenatal care. Prenatal care coverage alone was not associated with a meaningful increase in postpartum contraception or a reduction in subsequent short IPI births.

Anti-immigrant Rhetoric and the Experiences of Latino Immigrants in the Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: Anti-immigrant rhetoric and increased enforcement of immigration laws have induced worry and safety concerns among undocumented Latino immigrants (UDLI) and legal Latino residents/citizens (LLRC), with some delaying the time to care. In this study, we conducted a qualitative analysis of statements made by emergency department (ED) patients - a majority of whom were UDLI and LLRC - participating in a study to better understand their experiences and fears with regard to anti-immigrant rhetoric, immigration enforcement, and ED utilization. METHODS: We conducted a multi-site study, surveying patients in three California safety-net EDs serving large immigrant populations from June 2017-December 2018. Of 1684 patients approached, 1337 (79.4%) agreed to participate; when given the option to provide open-ended comments, 260 participants provided perspectives about their experiences during the years immediately following the 2016 United States presidential election. We analyzed these qualitative data using constructivist grounded theory. RESULTS: We analyzed comments from 260 individuals. Among ED patients who provided qualitative data, 59% were women and their median age was 45 years (Interquartile range 33-57 years). Undocumented Latino immigrants comprised 49%, 31% were LLRC, and 20% were non-Latino legal residents. As their primary language, 68% spoke Spanish. We identified six themes: fear as a barrier to care (especially for UDLI); the negative impact of fear on health and wellness (physical and mental health, delays in care); factors influencing fear (eg, media coverage); and future solutions, including the need for increased communication about rights. CONCLUSION: Anti-immigrant rhetoric during the 2016 US presidential campaign contributed to fear and safety concerns among UDLI and LLRC accessing healthcare. This is one of the few studies that captured firsthand experiences of UDLI in the ED. Our findings revealed fear-based barriers to accessing emergency care, protective and contributing factors to fear, and the negative impact of fear. There is a need for increased culturally informed patient communication about rights and resources, strategic media campaigns, and improved access to healthcare for undocumented individuals.

Perceived structural vulnerabilities among detained noncitizen immigrants in Minnesota.

Across several decades there has been an unprecedented increase in immigration enforcement including detention and deportation. Immigration detention profoundly impacts those experiencing detention and their family members. An emerging area of research has found that immigrants experience a number of challenges which constrain and limit their decisions, choices, and options for security and integration in the United States due to social, political and structural determinants. These determinants lead to greater structural vulnerabilities among immigrants. The purpose of the current study was to illuminate the perceived vulnerabilities of detained noncitizen immigrants as they are raised and described while attending case hearings at the Bloomington, Minnesota immigration court. Through conducting a thematic analysis of notes derived from third party immigration court observers, three areas of perceived vulnerability were identified. These perceived vulnerabilities include 1) migration and motivations to migrate, 2) structural vulnerabilities (e.g., discrimination, financial insecurity, social ties and family support, stable or fixed residence, English language proficiency, health and mental health) in the US, and 3) challenges in navigating immigration detention. These findings demonstrate that noncitizen immigrants who are undergoing immigration detention are experiencing multiple intersecting vulnerabilities which profoundly impact their lives. Collaborative efforts across sectors are needed to work towards comprehensive immigration reforms including both short-term and long-term solutions to address pressing issues for noncitizens undergoing immigration detention.

Immigration Detention in the United States: Identifying Alternatives That Comply With Human Rights and Advance Public Health.

Under international law, the United States is obligated to uphold noncitizens' fundamental rights, including their rights to health. However, current US immigration laws-and their enforcement-not only fail to fulfill migrants' health rights but actively undermine their realization and worsen the pandemic's spread. Specifically, the US immigration system's reliance on detention, which precludes effective social distancing, increases risks of exposure and infection for detainees, staff, and their broader communities. International agreements clearly state that the prolonged, mandatory, or automatic detention of people solely because of their migration status is a human rights violation on its own. But in the context of COVID-19, the consequences for migrants' right to health are particularly acute. Effective alternatives exist: other countries demonstrate the feasibility of adopting and implementing immigration laws that establish far less restrictive, social services-based approaches to enforcement that respect human rights. To protect public health and realize its global commitments, the United States must shift away from detaining migrants as standard practice and adopt effective, humane alternatives-both amid COVID-19 and permanently.

Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric, Deteriorating Health Access, and COVID-19 in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas.

The Rio Grande Valley of Texas has an exceptionally high number of COVID-19 cases and case fatality rate. The region makes up only 3% of the Texas population but, as of April 2021, accounted for 9% of the state's COVID-19 deaths. Additionally, during the summer of 2020, the Rio Grande Valley had one of the highest per capita infection rates in the United States. This paper explores the social-ecological elements that impact health-seeking behaviors in this community using interviews conducted with healthcare personnel and nonprofit leaders in the Rio Grande Valley between 2019 and 2020. Using this data, we found that anti-immigrant rhetoric has increased levels of fear among immigrants and mixed-status families, which has made them less willing to access healthcare. Additionally, we found that changes in the public charge rule has led to a decreasing number of children accessing government-provided health insurance. Our findings suggest that these outcomes likely contributed to the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak in the Rio Grande Valley.

Maternal health care utilization and the obstetric outcomes of undocumented women in Finland - a retrospective register-based study.

BACKGROUND: Undocumented pregnant women constitute a vulnerable group of people who lack equal access to pregnancy care. Previous research has shown that undocumented migrants encounter difficulties in accessing health services, the onset of prenatal care is delayed, and women have an increased risk for infectious diseases. The aim of this study was to describe the use of maternal health care services and the obstetric outcomes of undocumented women in Helsinki, capital city of Finland, in addition to comparing the results with all pregnant women in Finland. METHODS: The study was a retrospective register-based study consisting of data collected between 2014 to 2018 from the electronic medical records of the public maternity clinic and maternity hospital in Helsinki, Finland. The study population consists of 62 individual pregnancies of undocumented women. The results of the study were compared with national data on parturients and deliveries (N = 47,274 women) and with prenatal screening tests for infectious diseases (N = 51,447 [HIV, HBV], N = 51,446 [syphilis]). RESULTS: The majority (91%) of the undocumented women attended public prenatal care. However, four women received no prenatal care and three women were denied access to care. Undocumented women entered prenatal care later and had fewer visits compared with all pregnant women. The majority (71%) of the undocumented women received inadequate prenatal care as the number of visits was less than eight. Of the study population, 5% (3/59) tested positive for HIV, 3% (2/59) for HBV, and 2% (1/57) for syphilis. The prevalence of HIV (p-value < 0.001) and HBV (p-value = 0.007) was significantly higher amongst undocumented women compared with all pregnant women. CONCLUSIONS: Undocumented women entered prenatal care later than recommended. Most women received inadequate prenatal care and some of them did not receive prenatal care at all. The prevalence of infectious diseases was significantly higher and the coverage of prenatal screenings deficient amongst undocumented pregnant women.

Comparing immigration status and health patterns between Latinos and Asians: Evidence from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.

Undocumented status is widely recognized as an important social determinant of health. While undocumented immigrants have lower levels of health care access, they do not have consistently poorer physical health than the US-born or other immigrant groups. Furthermore, heterogeneity by race/ethnicity has been largely ignored in this growing literature. This paper used the 2001, 2004, 2008 panels of the restricted Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), one of the only representative surveys equipped to adequately identify Asian undocumented immigrants, to compare health patterns between Asians and Latinos by immigration status. We examined three general measures of health/health access: self-rated health, disability, and current health insurance. Latino undocumented immigrants displayed some advantages in self-rated health and disability but had lower insurance coverage compared to US-born Latinos. In contrast, Asian undocumented immigrants did not differ from US-born Asians in any of the three outcomes. While undocumented status has been proposed as a fundamental cause of disease, we found no evidence that Latino and Asian undocumented immigrants consistently fare worse in health access or physical health outcomes than immigrants in other status categories. Different racial groups also appeared to have unique patterns between immigration status and health outcomes from one another.

Cervical Cancer Prevention: Screening Among Undocumented Hispanic Women Compared With Documented Hispanic Women.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared cervical cancer knowledge, screening practices, and barriers to screening among undocumented and documented Hispanic women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was administered to self-identifying Hispanic women older than 21 years at community-based clinics and health care-focused community sites in Rhode Island. The survey included demographics, immigration status, questions related to cervical cancer knowledge, screening practices, and barriers to screening. Participants were stratified based on their immigration status. Categorical variables were compared by χ2 or Fisher exact test. Knowledge scores and the number of barriers were compared by t test and Wilcoxon rank sum test, respectively. p values of less than .05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Seventy-three undocumented women and 70 documented women were enrolled. Undocumented women had a significantly lower mean cervical cancer knowledge score (3.53, SD =1.97) compared with documented women (4.43, SD = 2.04; p = .0085) and also experienced more barriers to having cervical cytology or a human papillomavirus test (p = .001). Eighty-eight percent of the undocumented women and 47% of the documented women did not have health insurance (p < .0001). Sixty-two percent of the undocumented women felt that their lack of documentation was a barrier to cervical cancer screening. Fifty percent of the undocumented and 47% of the documented women had never heard of the human papillomavirus vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Undocumented women have significantly lower mean cervical cancer knowledge scores compared with documented women. A lack of legal documentation is a significant barrier to cervical cancer screening among Hispanic women. Challenges inherent to being undocumented may contribute to women's lower knowledge scores and more pronounced barriers.

Antidepressant adherence and its predictors in immigrants with depression: A population-based study.

ABSTRACT: Immigrants in Korea are relatively vulnerable in terms of medication self-management and have low levels of medication adherence. We aimed to evaluate antidepressant adherence and its patterns in immigrants and to identify predictors of nonadherence.In this matched cohort study using the National Health Insurance claims database, immigrants who were newly prescribed antidepressants were identified (n = 2,398). The immigrants were matched with native-born Koreans in a 1:1 ratio. Antidepressant adherence was measured by the medication possession ratio at monthly intervals. Logistic regression was performed to compare antidepressant nonadherence between immigrants and native-born Koreans, and to identify factors affecting immigrants' nonadherence.The average medication possession ratio of immigrants was 27.1%, which was lower than that of native-born Koreans (30.9%) (P = .038). Immigrants had a lower likelihood of adherence than native-born Koreans (odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3-0.92). Older age, visiting a psychiatrist for the first diagnosis of depression (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.60-3.13), achieving appropriateness of care (OR 3.54, 95% CI 2.51-4.98), and having a usual source of care (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.25-2.27) were associated with a higher likelihood of adherence in immigrants.This study showed that antidepressant adherence of immigrants was lower than that of native-born Koreans. However, it appears that visiting a psychiatrist, achieving appropriateness of care, and having a usual source of care might increase antidepressant adherence among immigrants. Further research that focuses on cultural and/or linguistic factors affecting immigrants' adherence and healthcare utilization is suggested as a way to increase adherence.

Comparison of Use of Health Care Services and Spending for Unauthorized Immigrants vs Authorized Immigrants or US Citizens Using a Machine Learning Model.

Importance: Knowledge about use of health care services (health care utilization) and expenditures among unauthorized immigrant populations is uncertain because of limitations in ascertaining legal status in population data. Objective: To examine health care utilization and expenditures that are attributable to unauthorized and authorized immigrants vs US-born individuals. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used the data on documentation status from the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (LAFANS) to develop a random forest classifier machine learning model. K-fold cross-validation was used to test model performance. The LAFANS is a randomized, multilevel, in-person survey of households residing in Los Angeles County, California, consisting of 2 waves. Wave 1 began in April 2000 and ended in January 2002, and wave 2 began in August 2006 and ended in December 2008. The machine learning model was then applied to a nationally representative database, the 2016-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), to predict health care expenditures and utilization among unauthorized and authorized immigrants and US-born individuals. A generalized linear model analyzed health care expenditures. Logistic regression modeling estimated dichotomous use of emergency department (ED), inpatient, outpatient, and office-based physician visits by immigrant groups with adjusting for confounding factors. Data were analyzed from May 1, 2019, to October 14, 2020. Exposures: Self-reported immigration status (US-born, authorized, and unauthorized status). Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual health care expenditures per capita and use of ED, outpatient, inpatient, and office-based physician care. Results: Of 47 199 MEPS respondents with nonmissing data, 35 079 (74.3%) were US born, 10 816 (22.9%) were authorized immigrants, and 1304 (2.8%) were unauthorized immigrants (51.7% female; mean age, 47.6 [95% CI, 47.4-47.8] years). Compared with authorized immigrants and US-born individuals, unauthorized immigrants were more likely to be aged 18 to 44 years (80.8%), Latino (96.3%), and Spanish speaking (95.2%) and to have less than 12 years of education (53.7%). Half of unauthorized immigrants (47.1%) were uninsured compared with 15.9% of authorized immigrants and 6.0% of US-born individuals. Mean annual health care expenditures per person were $1629 (95% CI, $1330-$1928) for unauthorized immigrants, $3795 (95% CI, $3555-$4035) for authorized immigrants, and $6088 (95% CI, $5935-$6242) for US-born individuals. Conclusions and Relevance: Contrary to much political discourse in the US, this cross-sectional study found no evidence that unauthorized immigrants are a substantial economic burden on safety net facilities such as EDs. This study illustrates the value of machine learning in the study of unauthorized immigrants using large-scale, secondary databases.

COVID-19 and Kidney Disease Disparities in the United States.

Racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, age, and sex-related health disparities in kidney disease are prominent in the United States. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately affected marginalized populations. Older adults, people experiencing unstable housing, racial and ethnic minorities, and immigrants are potentially at increased risk for infection and severe complications from COVID-19. The direct and societal effects of the pandemic may increase risk of incident kidney disease and lead to worse outcomes for those with kidney disease. The rapid transition to telemedicine potentially limits access to care for older adults, immigrants, and people experiencing unstable housing. The economic impact of the pandemic has had a disproportionate effect on women, minorities, and immigrants, which may limit their ability to manage kidney disease and lead to complications or kidney disease progression. We describe the impact of COVID-19 on marginalized populations and highlight how the pandemic may exacerbate existing disparities in kidney disease.

Health care for undocumented immigrants during the early phase of the Covid-19 pandemic in Lombardy, Italy.

Despite concern on the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on undocumented immigrants, quantitative evidence on the issue is scant. We analyze socioeconomic and health conditions of 1590 undocumented immigrants in Milan, Lombardy, one of the regions with the highest COVID-19 clinical burden in the world that does not guarantee access to primary care for these individuals. We document a sharp reduction in visit number after lockdown, with 16% frequency of acute respiratory infections, compatible with COVID-19. Moreover, housing conditions make it difficult to implement public health measures. Results suggest the need to foster primary care by undocumented immigrants to face COVID-19 emergency.

The Association Between Legal Status and Poverty Among Immigrants: A Methodological Caution.

Using nationally representative survey data, this research note examines the association between immigrant legal status and poverty in the United States. Our objective is to test whether estimates of this association vary depending on the method used to infer legal status in survey data, focusing on two approaches in particular: (1) inferring legal status using a logical imputation method that ignores the existence of legal-status survey questions (logical approach); and (2) defining legal status based on survey questions about legal status (survey approach). We show that the two methods yield contrasting conclusions. In models using the logical approach, among noncitizens, being a legal permanent resident (LPR) is counterintuitively associated with a significantly greater net probability of being below the poverty line compared with their noncitizen peers without LPR status. Conversely, using the survey approach to measure legal status, LPR status is associated with a lower net probability of living in poverty, which is in line with a growing body of qualitative and small-sample evidence. Consistent with simulation experiments carried out by Van Hook et al. (2015), the findings call for a more cautious approach to interpreting research results based on legal status imputations and for greater attention to potential biases introduced by various methodological approaches to inferring individuals' legal status in survey data. Consequently, the approach used for measuring legal status has important implications for future research on immigration and legal status.